Dismissed

Gollapalli Issac v. The Station House officer,Kothapatnam Police station

Telangana HC2 Mar 2012WP/5820/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses a Writ Petition challenging the registration of a criminal case under the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The High Court held that it is not the court's role to investigate the truth of the complaint in a writ proceeding.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is dismissed.

Gollapalli Issac Vs The Station House… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.5820 of 2012

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the respondent – Station House Officer, Kothapatnam Police Station, Prakasam District, in registering Crime No.3 of 2012 against the petitioner, based on a complaint of Sri Pinni Nageswara Rao, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶5

The de facto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent alleging that the petitioner, who is a Pastor, has collected Rs.15,000/- each from the persons, whose names were mentioned in the complaint, with a promise to get the houses constructed for them, but as he failed to keep up such promise, he was demanded for repayment of money. In view of the same, he is threatening the

¶6

de facto complainant to implicate him in a crime under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶7

In this Writ Petition, it is the case of the petitioner that in the complaint, the name of the de facto complainant is not mentioned in the list of persons, who have paid the

¶8

amount for the purpose of houses.

¶9

It is well settled that any person, who need not necessarily be affected in the crime, can set the criminal law in motion. It is to be noticed that though the above crime was registered against the petitioner based on the aforesaid complaint, the de facto complainant is not even made party respondent in this Writ Petition. Though it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no complaint from any of the persons, whose names were mentioned in the complaint, it is a matter for investigation by the police and the said aspect cannot be gone into in this Writ Petition.

¶10

In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶11

______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J

¶12

2^nd MARCH, 2012. kvni

Gollapalli Issac v. The Station House officer,Kothapatnam Police station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gollapalli Issac v. The Station House officer,Kothapatnam Police station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Timmiri Srinivasa Rao S/o Venkatachalam, Vs The Sub Inspector of Police, Lando, Suryaraopet

Vuppala Venkaiah, Vs The Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise

P. Ganesh Kumar, Vs The Commissioner of Police

Samala Krishna Murthy Vs The Station House Officer

M/s Kovai Engineering Works a.P.(P) Ltd., Vs The Superintendent of Police

Angadi Mahalakshmi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh